Whats The Best Defencive Equipment Pak Needs

That is not because of the Soviet/Russian doctrine. The reason so many Russian/Soviet gunships got shotdown was b/c in the 80s and early 90's, the Russians did not have many stand-off range anti-tank/armour weapons available to them. They would make use of the Heli-mounted HMGs and the likes of 68mm unguided rockets to strafe enemy concentrations. In order to do so, the helis had to line up for attack and then get close to the targets. In this environment, its hard to survive a SAM. Even though the Hind was considered to be the primary gunship for the Soviets, it lacked the long range target acquisition capabilities (at stand-off distances) available to US and many of the NATO forces now.

During the Vietnam conflict, the US Army lost quite a lot of helis in the same way as the Russians did in Afghanistan.

AT-6 was given the NATO designation of Spiral. Sagger was the older SA-3 stuff.

Even with the AT-6, the Russians were limited to 5000 meters stand-off range, not much compared with Hellfire. Its comparitive to TOW, however the guidance was via IR, and not laser guided (as in the case of Hellfire).

The bottom line is that Russians were limited in terms of technology back then. They had to get close enough to make an impact on the target. They have chaged their tactics as the HW available to them has afforded this luxury. Back then, they just had no other choice but to get in close.

You are correct, it is the Spiral.
Note that the AH-1 also uses stand off tactics when there is a significant AAA/MANPADS threat however.

A range of 5,000 meters for AT-6 is WELL beyond the range of almost all AAA and most MANPADS. So if the Soviets had so chosen they could have easily used it in that role, but their doctrine dictates otherwise.

You can also see that Soviet/Russian helos were and still are built with more speed and manueverability than their western contemporaries because of the differing doctrines they employ.

The Russians doctrines totally differ from the United States, so it should come as no surprise to you that their attack helos mimic the trend.

Just look at the differences between the Soviet doctrine of Advance in Echelon as opposed to the US AirLand Battle.

thats because the US doctrines revolve around the zero casualty rule. the russians never did. this sort of doctrine only works when you have overwhelming force at your side. at the first sign of trouble in afghanistan, the people on the ground called down air support from the aircrafts patrolling above. the hell fire, and the Jdams are all designed to hit accurately from afar. the hinds were all built like tanks.... they could absorb anti armour rounds and keep on smiling. the stingers destroyed that invulnerability.

india and Pakistan both operate on the straffing doctrines..... reason is their lack of technology which gives them the strike from afar capability. although india is fast acquiring technology which can be used to do just that....

Pakistan is also developing technology to counter that threat of fire from afar......... an example is the anza 3. in the end, the weopon with more range is going to make the impact.

Wire-guided ATGMs have their own shortcomings though. TOW is effective as long as there is clear line of sight for the operator. What may enhance Pakistan's anti-tank capability by manifolds would be a laser-guided ATGM.

Again this is just my opinion.

One more thing, Cobra gunships are flown by Pakistani Army Aviation and not the PAF.

Further, while there is no doubt that the Hellfire is a superior weapon than TOW, the earler TOW missile is still quite capable, and is still in widespread use in the USMC cobra fleet, as well as being the standard heavy ATGM of the US Army.

The main drawback of TOW is it's low flight speed, forcing the attacker to stay exposed while the TOW is guided onto target.

Well first, America is NOT Pakistan's enemy and Pakistan does consider it an enemy. So Pakistan has no need of an ICBM anyway but rest assured Pakistan is cabale of developing the technology for ICBM. But does not have any reason to develop it either.

However Pakistan needs to concentrate on a ABM system and if possible an indegenious version would be nice.

Care to tell me where will be the money coming from all this...just a thought (!)

There is a money tree right outside the Pakistan ministry of defence Just kidding.

I think as it has been happening, Pakistan will purchase these things piecemeal. I think the GoP focus on the economy is the right thing at the moment. As the economy expands (things are looking up), Pakistan will look into additional acquisitions.

Pakistan has never, and will never go on the kind of spending spree that India has embarked upon. Most of the purchases will in defensive equipment to counter purchases already made by India.

Care to tell me where will be the money coming from all this...just a thought (!)

There is a money tree right outside the Pakistan ministry of defence Just kidding.

I think as it has been happening, Pakistan will purchase these things piecemeal. I think the GoP focus on the economy is the right thing at the moment. As the economy expands (things are looking up), Pakistan will look into additional acquisitions.

Pakistan has never, and will never go on the kind of spending spree that India has embarked upon. Most of the purchases will in defensive equipment to counter purchases already made by India.

There is a money tree right outside the Pakistan ministry of defence Just kidding.

Hey send me the seeds... Better have one in my neibhourhood

I think as it has been happening, Pakistan will purchase these things piecemeal. I think the GoP focus on the economy is the right thing at the moment. As the economy expands (things are looking up), Pakistan will look into additional acquisitions.

Economy will go a long way in improving your country so its the best bet right now. But face it right now PAK economy is downright Pathetic.

Pakistan has never, and will never go on the kind of spending spree that India has embarked upon. Most of the purchases will in defensive equipment to counter purchases already made by India.

Yeah sure people her feel that, Pakistan so build ICBMs, Buy 800 fighter jets. Have about 15 submarines and what not. Plus, they want to build bases overseas for power projection, hm.... now is that just countering India?????

Anyways, what India is buying is from the threat perception of China, but if Pakistan feels threatned that cannot be helped. India's current capability is more than enough to tackle PAK.

Sams like cortale or su300 or 400 can all be destoryed by HARM missiles like they played havoc with Iraqi air defences.

What Pakistan's best defensive equipment to the most threatening indian force which is the Indian Airforce should be shoulder launched highly sophisticated, reliable and long range sams which are able to correct their position in mid course. Best option would be to add the technology to our present proven low altitude anza mk missiles which will not only be cheap but always be available to us as the history has thought us not to depend on others for our survival be it USA or China.

Naval version of Anza with a higher tnt expolsive and ship borne radar radiation seeking warhead would also be a good choice for Pakistan navy.

For destroying systems like S-300 or S-400 you have to come in to range to launch the missile. These are one of the best class of SAM's avalible rite now...they are almost deaf to jamming and S-400 even has a standoff range of more than 250+ km for fighter size aircrafts. And its not so easy to just launch a harm and go off in the thick wood. most probably S-400 would be able to intercept the Harm missile itself for that matter of fact. Once detected what makes you think that you won't be intercepted first by fighters??
and also there are always counter measures agaist HARM type missiles.

asd985 Awacs don't cost a billion maybe around 250-500 million depending on the model you wanna procure. But again its not so easy to buy an awacs and just use it. ITs not like a plug and play device. You have to have coherrent coordination between the ground based systems and the AWACS to fully utilize the capablity of an AWACS. Even though an awacs can work without ground bases sytems but its not practical. Ground based radars coordinate with the AWACS. AWACS detects a target alerts the radars in the vicinity of approcting targets and SAM batteries to take apporprite steps and at the same time directs fighters. This is quite hard in the case of Pakistan and india as they both have a collection of radars ranging from various sources, this was the prime ground for rejection of A-50 mainstay by the indian airforce. This integration has to be done in house or on special order which might cost a bit more.

Economy as an option sounds good but at the same time you can't neglet your defence. The way things move let them carry on and as economy increases so will the defece budjet but atleast not in the current decade

SO u are afraid of Pakistan having ICBMS science they can reach America ....???? (w00t) (w00t)

Man of Courage,

Ever heard of our ABM system.

I don't think our Govt will let you develop ICBMS. Don't even dream to nuke us.

Your govt never let Paksitan to develop NUKES as well. :megalol Its true that ur govt have loads of pressure on Paksitani govt and u screw them when ever u got chance. But they have to live on this earth on their own not on ur govt. And who cares ur govt! :smoking>

There is a serious flaw in ur assumptions as an ideal army. Dunno why ppl on this forum give so much imporatance to tanks and everything centered around tank battle and stuff. An army should have more firepower based on artillery guns, MRLS and short range missiles to curb the enemy offensives. It has been quite often that slowly ppl are paying more and more immportance to APC's rather than tanks, with good gattling guns with armour piercing AP rounds combined with anti tank missiles can be more dangerous than a tank. Tanks are falling pray for gunships and even cases like mines, and much more hand held ATGMS etc. all it takes is a carl gustav hit at the tracks or back to disable the tnak in the battle field. Not saying they are not important but yea in a limited number to resist other tanks and hold the battle ground. But more emphasis should be placed on survillance and in turn effective briging down of fire onthe enemy from distance. I hope many of you guys can agree onthis.

There is alot , alot Pakistani forces, police, rangers need equipment. I believe alot needs to be seen whats US and European Countries leaving in Afghanistan.

Many other defence and technology, equipment army needs like radars, cctv cameras on borders and alot of other new Urban requirements.

The paramilitary forces need better training than equipment. FC and Rangers have good equipment, much more than they could ever have imagined ever to have in their inventory. Its the training of the regulars they lack.

Army has best equipment available like infantry regiments have human movement sensors/radars in their inventories.

"Everyone, except those who are ignorant, knows that the Quran is the general code of the Muslims. A religious, social, civil, commercial, military, judicial, criminal, penal code, it regulates everything from the ceremonies of religion to those of daily life; from the salvation of the soul to the health of the body; from the rights of all to those of each individual; from morality to crime, from punishment here to that in the life to come, and our Prophet has enjoined on us that every Musalman should possess a copy of the Quran and be his own priest. Therefore Islam is not merely confined to the spiritual tenets and doctrines or rituals and ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society, every department of life, collective[ly] and individually."

- Jinnah , Eid message in September 1945.

He called upon the mammoth Lahore audience to build up "Pakistan as a bulwark of Islam", to "live up to your traditions and add to it another chapter of glory", adding, "If we take our inspiration and guidance from the Holy Quran, the final victory, I once again say, will be ours"

I think Ajaj is the only one who gets it. We are talking about defence and all the others can think of is offence?

Defence would be SAMs, anti balistic missiles, interceptors like the F-16's, anti-tank artillery, and the dozens of midget submarines that we already have, plus frigates and destroyers.

Nukes and ICBMs are a deterrent, don't you dare try anything.

Offence is a horribly bad defence if your defence is weak and penetrable.

Hakim Bey: Don't just survive while waiting for someone's revolution to clear your head
Napoleon Bonaparte: The world suffers a lot, not because of the violence of bad people, but because of the silence of good people!